Richard Spencer is one of the Daily Telegraph's Middle East correspondents. Married with three children, he was previously news editor, and then China correspondent for six years. He is based in Cairo.

The Olympics were already political

Here's a quick something for my non-specialist readers, with a promise to the rest that I will return to the topic of Tibet shortly. (Thank you for the emails about the last post, by the way, which have inspired new thoughts on that matter).

A pro-Tibet protestor confronts Liu Qi in Greece

Today I guess many people will have already seen the quick demonstration by Reporters without Borders at the torch-lighting ceremony in Olympia, even though the official broadcast, which was being shown on stations round the world, cut away from the scene when it realised what was going on.

The man talking at the time was Liu Qi, who was accurately described by the BBC at least as head of the Beijing Olympic Organising Committee.

But what few reports have made clear is that he is more than that. In fact, to all intents and purposes he is not the head of the Organising Committee, if by that we mean he is some sports administrator seconded to make the archery, synchronised swimming and 100 metres all run smoothly.

Mr Liu is president by virtue of his position as secretary of the Beijing Communist Party – the capital's number one man, if you like. He is also a member of the Chinese politburo, confirmed at the last Party Congress in the autumn.

I say that for basic information, but it also has to be said it does seem to me to add something to the question of whether and how the Games are being "politicised".

It is ironic to see the Chinese government decry attempts to "politicise" this event. This is not because (or at least only because) of its broader use to legitimise its rule, its claims to Tibet, its glorious management of China's rise, or whatever people choose to target. It is because under the Communist Party system, politicising all of society is the name of the game.

It is not unique in this. The Kuomintang, its nationalist predecessor, was also a Leninist party, in that it insisted it should reach through to all spheres of public life. KMT members assumed important roles in universities, local government, the army, to identify the party with the common good just as the CCP does today.

It is not just the titular head of the Olympic Committee: many leading sports administrators are Party members first, just as the Party effectively controls whole areas of public life from my local neighbourhood committee upwards.

This includes outlets where you would not think politics were particularly relevant, such as orchestras and the Peking Opera, university science departments, school administrations, and so on and so forth. In all these cases, I have come across cases where Party apparatchiks have made important decisions in surprising areas for purely political reasons.

Mr Liu is in an especially interesting position in this regard. He was widely assumed to be in the political faction of Jiang Zemin, the former president; it was at one stage unclear whether he would be reappointed to the politburo, but it always seemed to me unlikely he would be replaced so soon before the Games.

On the other hand, another politburo figure, Xi Jinping, was recently appointed above his head to oversee all Olympic issues this year. Mr Xi is predicted to be the next president of China, and his relationship with the older Mr Liu would be fascinating to watch, if there were any chance we would get close enough to see.

Just a few points of Chinese kremlinology for you, but one worth bearing in mind next time you read that the Games are supposed to be non-political.

Mr Liu's equivalent for London 2012 is also a politician, of course, Sebastian Coe, though he is also an Olympian of some note. Lord Coe, though, is a member of the Opposition: now that really is something the Chinese government would regard as odd.